Tread with care on mental health bill

Published 3:13 pm, Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Although the horrific incident that focused the country's attention on curbing gun violence occurred here in Connecticut, neighboring New York beat us to the line in responding with a package of new legislation.

That's OK. While it is true that it is long past time for every state and the nation as a whole to take action in the face of frequent mass shootings, it is more important to take the right action. The New York laws just passed give us opportunity to reflect. The package signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo was bold and comprehensive. It was not, however, perfect, and parts could have unintended consequences.

Those consequences are most likely to come in the area of mental health, the most complicated and enigmatic piece of the puzzle that we all hope holds the key to reducing tragedies like Newtown. Unlike other, more black-and-white pieces, like gun legislation and security methods, the mental health area is colored gray through and through.

One mental health element addressed in the New York laws in particular must be treated very carefully here. It requires therapists and other health providers to report to authorities any patient they consider a threat to themselves or others. Government authorities would then be able to act, including confiscating any guns the person might have.

There will be pressure on Connecticut lawmakers to pass a package at least as comprehensive as New York's. But before the Legislature suggests or considers a new mandatory-reporting rule like the one above, lawmakers must take time to thoroughly discuss potential consequences with experts in the field of health care.

The rule is a game changer, and the potential for harm, though unintended, is great.

At first blush, it might seem obvious: If a therapist thinks a client is a threat, of course the therapist should alert authorities, and of course they should take away the patient's guns.

But the downside should be clear: Some people, maybe many, who harbor disturbing thoughts, an inner drive to commit violence, will not seek help, or not admit those thoughts to a therapist, if they know the admission could bring the police to their door.

So potentially violent people who might be helped with the correct therapy might never get it, which means violent acts that might be prevented could wind up occurring.

Of particular concern is the requirement that a therapist notify authorities if a client is a threat to him or herself. Sometime today, or sometime this week, in every counseling center in every college and university in the state, a psychologist or social worker will speak to a student who has a desire to hurt himself, to kill herself. It is one of the most common and most serious problems that school counselors deal with.

How many of those young people will not seek help if they know they cannot trust the counselor to keep their problems private? How many will try to deal with those problems themselves if they know a visit to the campus counseling center will result in a knock on their dorm room door?

Any provision in a legislative package aimed at curbing deadly violence is going to be controversial, from gun laws on down. Legislators are going to have to show backbone to do the right thing. But they are going to have to display wisdom as well, and not just pass strong laws, but sensible and careful ones. Nowhere is that more important than in the area of mental health, particularly when it comes to notification requirements.